Cover Up? First Trump Fired Sally Yates, Now His Administration Is Blocking Her From Testifying

• DOJ Tells Yates She ‘Needs to Consult With the White House’ to Be Allowed to Testify

• Intel Chair Cancels Hearing Same Day Yates Attorney Sends White House Letter Stating Why She Must Be Allowed to Testify

Just a few hours after then-Acting Attorney General Sally Yates notified President Donald Trump she could not defend his Muslim ban in court, citing its illegality and likeliness of being unconstitutional, Trump fired her. Weeks later, Americans learned that days before firing Yates, she had told him his National Security Advisor, Michael Flynn, was susceptible to blackmail from Russia.

It took Trump weeks to fire Flynn, and he did so not because of what Yates told him, that his top national security advisor was possibly compromised from one of America’s greatest enemies, but supposedly because he had not been truthful with Vice President Mike Pence – a charge some also dispute.

Now, the Trump administration is blocking Yates from testifying before the House Intelligence Committee, headed by embattled Chairman Devin Nunes.

“The Trump administration sought to block former acting attorney general Sally Yates from testifying to Congress in the House investigation of links between Russian officials and Donald Trump’s presidential campaign,” The Washington Post reports, “a position that is likely to further anger Democrats who have accused Republicans of trying to damage the inquiry.”

Citing letters they have reviewed,  The Post reports “the Justice Department notified Yates earlier this month that the administration considers a great deal of her possible testimony to be barred from discussion in a congressional hearing because the topics are covered by the presidential communication privilege.”

Yates was not expected to, nor would she, disclose classified information.

On March 23, Yates’ attorney, David O’Neill sent a letter to Acting Assistant Attorney General Samuel Ramer, stating, in part, “we believe that Ms. Yates should not be obligated to refuse to provide non-classified facts about the department’s notification to the White House of concerns about the conduct of a senior official. Requiring Ms. Yates to refuse to provide such information is particularly untenable given that multiple senior administration officials have publicly described the same events.”

The following day Yates’ attorney sent a similar letter to White House counsel Donald McGahn, which NBC News obtained (below). That same day Intelligence Committee Chair Nunes canceled the hearing during which Yates was to testify.

Also on March 24, a Justice Department official replied, The Post reports, “saying the conversations with the White House ‘are likely covered by the presidential communications privilege and possibly the deliberative process privilege. The president owns those privileges. Therefore, to the extent Ms. Yates needs consent to disclose the details of those communications to [the intelligence panel], she needs to consult with the White House.'”

To comment on this article and other NCRM content, visit our Facebook page.

Image by U.S. Customs and Border Protection via Flickr